Is the FBI a Terrorist Organization?

OKC Bombing Used FBI Explosives

The FBI Allowed the 1993 WTC Bombing to Happen

Witnesses say "Underwear Bomber" was government operation

US Hatched Terror Plots

FBI Responsibility for US Terror Plots

The Informants

Book Burning In the Digital Age... and so it begins

This syndicated article was originally written in protest of internet censorship efforts that were taking place a number of years ago. The essay was widely circulated at the time and hailed as a wonderful synopsis of the efforts to deny internet free speech up to that point. In the years since it was first published, the corporate-government attack on internet free speech has never ceased.  The latest incarnation was CISPA, and it seems that these bills are coming before Congress in rapid-fire succession now. The pressure is on. We thought you might enjoy reading the back-story though, the history of attacks on your right to information. 

This article is used by permission, special thanks to J.Marselus VanWagner. 

(To share this article, please use a snippet, proper attribution, and a link to this source, as per direction of the original author.)



The battle of the copyright is a long and sordid tale on the internet. Most folks are familiar with the old days of Napster, and the record companies suing the pants off of soccer-Moms because their kids had downloaded songs to the family computer. More recently as technology has continued to advance, we have seen movie companies also come into the fold along with the music companies, often suing to shut down websites that host torrent files of copyrighted material, as well as still going after the individual on occasion. At the end of the day though, most folks aren't overly concerned about those issues. Music and movies are creative expressions and public past-times for the most part, not exactly a priority in this day and age. It all sounds like a lot of hair-splitting over profits that no one really wants to be bothered with. Sure artists are entitled to make money from their work. But at the same time, when someone shells out $20 for a CD that has one good song on it, it's clearly a rip-off scheme by the recording industry too. A big ball of frustration and argument that is best left to the folks who have a vested interest in the fight. The whole debate has just soured many people to listening to music or watching movies at all. Easier just to flip on the radio or the TV and be done with it. Music and movies just aren't much fun as a hobby anymore, which is probably a bigger reason for any perceived loss of revenue for these big companies than anything else. Some folks have just decided to grow up faster than we would have liked to, wistfully leaving pop-culture behind to focus on more important issues. Like freedom of speech, perhaps.

Now anyone who has had contact with American society in the past fifteen years or so has heard all about these copyright lawsuits, and has probably heard the argument that it is all “really about freedom of speech.” Most of us never really bought into that though. It wasn't really about freedom of speech so much as buying a cable modem and ripping enough tracks to make a mix disc for the weekend, and to make it worth the money you were shelling out for the broadband connection. But as it turns out, these freedom-loving pirate pioneers might have had more insight than most of us ever gave them credit for. It's not just about ripping a free copy of some crappy pop jam anymore. The debates over sharing content over the internet are no longer the frontier of internet free-speech. The goalposts have been on the move it seems.

In 1993 there were about 50 corporations that controlled just about all of the media in the United States. Newspapers, magazines, radio, television, the works. By 2004, we were down to only five corporations controlling it all. Since the collapse of United Press International, the Associated Press has been the one and only national news service in the United States. This means that just about all the news you see is filtered through this one single company. Even local news from your home town is partially owned by the AP, as part of their agreement with smaller news agencies that make up their network. If there is a big enough story in your hometown, it gets handed up to the AP and sent out across the wires to be picked up by every other news agency across the country, as an AP article, not usually even giving a mention of your local hometown newspaper or reporter that broke the story. But in return, these smaller news agencies get to print other AP news, which accounts for just about anything that is being reported on any given day. This gives the AP a huge amount of leverage over how news gets reported, even if it does not originate with them. No news agency would dare defy the AP, and risk losing their agreement to print just about anything that is being considered news. It would be business suicide. The mainstream media in America is a network dominated by the AP. Not exactly an ideal arrangement for the promise of free speech. There was a time that we as freedom-loving Americans saw a singular state-controlled media as the hallmark of an evil totalitarian Communist regime, but would it really be any better to have a single corporation reporting all of the news rather than the state? Hardly. That would simply make it the hallmark of a Fascist totalitarian state rather then a Communist one. You see, Communism is what you get when the government controls business. Fascism is what you get when business controls government. In a nutshell anyway.

Thanks to technology, we still have a bastion of free speech with the internet. Even while your average American is content to sit back and zone out to regurgitated tabloid news, for many of us, the internet is as enlightening as it can be frustrating and confusing, navigating the back corridors of truth. The news here is not pre-packaged and heated in the microwave. It is raw, and requires critical thinking, cleverness, memory. In short, here you have to stop and think. If the truth is handed to you on a silver platter, it just might not be the truth, just like that might not be beef in that fast food taco. It's a shame that more folks aren't interested to look a little deeper into things, and are content to take the half-truths of the mainstream media as a complete source of important information. But at least the rest of us have the internet, this beacon of liberty and free speech. Well, for the moment anyway. It seems that our days may be numbered, and dwindling fast now.

Back in the summer of 2008, the Associated Press, a monolithic news agency with a litigious history decided it was going to set the precedent for how their material was disseminated across the internet, by issuing Digital Millennium Copyright Act takedown notices to bloggers and news aggregators they claimed were violating their copyright and additionally were accused of “hot news” misappropriation under New York State law. They had already slapped two companies with copyright lawsuits not long before, one in Florida. In essence, this was the beginning of the AP trying to force the entire U.S.-based internet to become another one of their subsidiaries under licensing agreement.

Now to really understand this, we need to have a look at what is called the “fair use” act. What it tells us first is that copyrighted material can be used without permission, for such purposes as “criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research.” Seems quite reasonable, but too bad it's not quite that simple. You see, there really are no set guidelines. Even from that list there can be any number of exceptions based on the nature of the copyright work, potential profits from someone who is citing the work, and so forth. It is all so completely ambiguous that they might just as well have said, “Use whatever you want at your own risk because it's all up to the judge anyway.” That's really no exaggeration. Rulings in one case will not necessarily be used as a precedent in the next, particularly in civil suits, though copyright violation can be a criminal matter as well. There are no set standards for selected content, length or proportions of quotations, or potential market impact. Nevertheless, it has still been used as a general guideline for everyone from internet bloggers to public school teachers. An example might be the playing of a movie in the auditorium of a public school for students. It may not be considered a violation of copyright because it is being used for educational purposes. But if that same movie were to be played in an auditorium full of families at the ice-cream social gathering where goodies were being sold to raise money for a field trip, that could very well indeed be ruled as a liability through public dissemination of copyrighted material. Many restaurants can no longer sing the “Happy Birthday” song to patrons on their special day because of the threat of copyright lawsuits.

Across the internet though, it has been generally understood by bloggers and members of discussion forums and so forth, that news reports are not treated with the same level of copyright scrutiny as other media such as movies and music. After all, news is a relatively public matter anyway. Granted, reporters work hard often risking life and limb to get their stories, other staff all do their jobs, the news agencies have their expenses and financial obligations to investors, but at the end of the day the events they are reporting on are public events that they are willfully sharing with the greater public. In print they share it with the public for pocket change, but on their own internet sites they even share the news for free, and quite often encourage viewers to share it on networking tools such as Twitter or an RSS feed. The profitability in news reporting is not in the news itself, but in advertising revenues from companies who know that people will see their ad when they come to find out the news of the day, whether it be in print, over the airwaves, or over the internet. So really, it is in the best interest of any news agency to get the news out there as far and wide as possible, so long as they are referenced in some way. Let's not forget the old adage “there's no such thing as bad press.”

Copying and pasting an entire article may be seen as not really acting in good faith on the part of the blogger, but so long as it is properly attributed, it really should not be of serious concern to a news company. It's not really going to cost them anything. No one is going to decide that they would rather see their mainstream search engine news in some backwater blog day after day where the articles may be missing pictures, related links, and be generally mutilated in a hack paste job. Most folks will want to go right to the source, and see a copy/paste job merely as reference for discussion. Adding a link to any pasted article is certain to drive traffic back to the original news site, with folks who might never have even bothered to check the day's news otherwise. When most internet users post these articles, they are not posting it to circumvent the original news services and are not claiming the articles as their own original material, they are posting for the purposes of discussion, not plagiarism. Whether it be to critique the report itself, the news source overall, or as a general discussion related to the news being reported, the news article itself still becomes secondary to our own expression of free-speech. In this way we see that even a fully copied article could be seen as fair use, as a reference in these discussions.

So understanding all of this, one really has to ask, what was really behind the aggression of the AP against bloggers and other websites? Especially when you have a look at some of the specific instances they had issued the DMCA notices for. Many did not even copy the same headline, all of them contained links back to the original AP source, and none of them were even full posts of the article. They were merely snippets of the article, with a link back to the original complete article. You would think that the AP would be thanking them, not trying to sue them. You can see that down in the corner here of the MSMReview we even have a host-provided widget installed that runs an AP headline ticker. Is that something that we can be sued for? Could we be sued if we posted those same headlines without the widget?

By the end of 2008 it appears that the AP decided to back off a bit, and admitted that they might have been being a bit heavy-handed in the protection of their media. But one really has to wonder what set them on in the first place to such an ill-conceived venture. The only potential loss of revenue might have come from the fact that many news outlets in their network will pull an article after a bit of time, and then charge a fee for retrieval from an archive. In this way, a blog or forum could be seen as archiving these stories and undermining a very minor potential source of revenue. How often do folks actually go ahead and pay for an article for which the link is no longer active for, and especially in comparison to the potential for referral traffic generated by articles posted outside of the original site? Moreover, do they charge your local library a fee for making old newspapers available to the public after the articles have been pulled from the website? Granted, the library already paid 50-cents for a copy of the paper, but if that token amount were really the issue, then why do they not charge to read the headlines on their own websites and the large search engine hosts?

It just doesn't make sense, there is something missing from this picture still. Now we come to more recent news. It seems that other news sources are now hiring outside companies to do their dirty work for them, having a go at the bloggers and forums this summer in a similar manner that the AP did back in 2008, but on a much wider scale, and even more aggressively this time. Are they really so desperate for quick profits that they are willing to cut off their noses just to spite their faces? Are they really willing to alienate readers, and in turn their advertising clients, to scrape a few bucks away from bloggers? Was the whole AP fiasco just a “testing of the water” to to gauge reaction to an assault on free speech?

Steve Gibson, CEO of Las Vegas-based Righthaven has been buying up newspaper copyrights for the sole purpose of scouring the web to find and then sue anyone who has posted material without permission. He is able to compel quick settlements based on the fact that even a single violation can be a penalty of $150,000. Righthaven already has hundreds of lawsuits in the works, but estimates that there may be billions of violations. That will not doubt put any nickel and dime blogs and web sites right out of business. Many blogs and forums that could be seen as a profit company because of ad placement through services such as AdSense, really are not actually profitable at all, and are generally operated for reasons other than profit, such as practicing free speech and engaging their fellow human beings in discussion on current events via the internet. But even for larger sites, the threat is potent, seeing how much they stand to lose for even a single violation if they fight it in court then lose. One large internet forum that generates about 5 million hits a month with their user-generated discussion forum on alternative topics has decided to fight the lawsuit on the grounds that the site itself did not actually post the material, but that a forum user did, and therefore rather than file a lawsuit Righthaven should have served the site with a DMCA takedown notice. So in this case, we see that this company operating on behalf of the Las Vegas Review-Journal has actually gone well beyond what the AP did two summers ago. They aren't even bothering with take-down notices, they are going straight for the lawsuit. It is also interesting to note that this representative of the media has gone after one of the largest alternative subject matter forums on the internet, where open-minded free-thinking is highly valued (even if critically scrutinized.)

In another case, one of the above-mentioned forum's primary competitors has also been the subject of an action by a company representing Reuters news service, the AP of the British-influenced world. Again coming under fire is a forum on alternative subject matter where open-minded free-thinking is courted (even if dreadfully manipulated.) That case is part of a campaign launched in March by California-based Attributor with their FairShare Guardian model. In one 30-day scan with this new model, they found 75,000 sites with copies of un-licensed articles. Rather than suing them in court, Attributor offers discussion on syndication, in which they can pretty much demand any price they want for the syndication rights from the alleged violator. If negotiations fail, they will contact ad agencies doing business with the site. In the case of the specific site mentioned here already, the ad agencies did indeed pull their ads, the site's primary revenue stream for covering operating costs. Attributor also notifies search engines and web hosts, who are obligated under the DMCA to take down material they know to be in violation. So in essence, these forums are forced to pay the licensing fee for what might otherwise be considered fair-use, or be shut down entirely.

Now we finally see a pattern emerging. First, the somewhat failed attempt by AP to shutter blogs and websites that they had zeroed in on for whatever reason. Now we see on one hand a venture to force settlements that will likely shut down many thousands of blogs and websites. And on the other hand, we see due-process completely circumvented by a company demanding what can be assumed to be exorbitant licensing fees, and also sure to shut down thousands, even hundreds of thousands of websites. But can all this really be seen as a measure to protect profits? Certainly not when you consider that these blogs and websites are what drive traffic to these news sources in the first place. So then, this really isn't about profits so much as consolidation. One doesn't need a hundred-thousand blogs directing traffic to a few news sites, if a huge chunk of the web is shut right down entirely, and traffic can be directed through a few select mainstream social networking sites. This is about control, not profits. Controlling what you see, how you see it, and even the discussions you have about it. Bloggers are being forced to report the news under the terms dictated by licensing agreements, and whatever fine print that might entail aside from kicking up a fee as if news reporting were some mafia cartel. That is not free speech. This is about controlling our collective memory by editing and pulling articles and by preventing accessibility to archived copies of original stories floating around on the web. And that folks, is the real heart of the matter. Digital book burning. Remove our collective memory, mold the present, and dictate the future.

Whoa now. Maybe that's a bit of a jump there. A few select very powerful media monopolies shutting down the internet piece by piece? Sounds like a bit of a stretch into conspiracy-theory land there, no? Surely the government would have something to say about this, would step in to defend liberty and the Constitution? We have been like Gunny Hartman in the movie Full Metal Jacket here, rummaging through the unlocked footlocker of internet dirty laundry to “just see if anything's missing here.” And suddenly we find the jelly donut. Or better yet, that something is indeed missing. Something big. Something along the lines of 73,000 blogs shut down in a single day, with the flip of a switch. Here we get a good look at the relationship between business and the government.


On July 9 of this year, Toronto-based Blogetry.com, an internet blogging platform and Wordpress host-provider with approximately 73,000 clients, went dark. Less than a week later, Ipbfree.com, a site used to create web message boards, suddenly went offline. The shutdowns came with no notice, no pending legal action, and no explanation at all for some considerable time. Since then, some information has come out about the shut-down of Blogetry.com, so we are going to focus on that, as the information surrounding the Ipbfree.com seems to be far more scattered and less reliable. It should be noted that no direct correlation between the two events has been confirmed at this point, but there were some interesting similarities between the two events. Both said they were shut down by outside influence and not coming back, that the user-generated content violated no copyright laws, and that those who ordered the closures were legally bound to non-disclosure.

Initial speculation was that the shutdowns were part of a sweep by movie or record companies cracking down on illegal downloads and hosting of related files, with the support of the Obama Administration who has vowed to support the entertainment companies. It was not an unreasonable conclusion to reach, as these shutdowns came right on the heels of a number of scattered seizures by the Department of Justice along with Immigration and Customs Enforcement of assets and websites related to alleged illegal file-sharing, as part of an ongoing initiative called “Operation: In Our Sights.” So there we are back to the beginning of this article, with the “menace of digital piracy” that we have all been hearing about for years. One sure-fire method for Federal agents to conduct a “witch-hunt” by going after alleged pirates.

Other speculation was that perhaps there was child pornography involved. Another fantastic boogie man to get the people all riled up while being the perfect cover for officials to go right ahead and do just about anything they please. Now please understand, MSMR in no way is trying to make light of child pornography, or excuse the activities of deranged persons involved in that garbage in any way, but having to articulate that point goes to show just what a raw nerve there is there in society for the powers that be to poke at when they want to distract us. Even when they yell pedophile, we still have the right, nay, the obligation to question authority. But in cases of illegal file-sharing, and even in cases of illegal pornography, due process must still be applied. No agency has the right to arbitraliy march in and shut down a whole chunk of the internet. There is a lot of legal wrangling that can sometimes go on for years to get a specific website shutdown, much less an entire server of 73,000 clients. The DMCA protects internet service providers from liability of user content, as pointed out in the case mentioned earlier with Righthaven. Not to mention the fact that these sorts of takedowns are usually very public affairs, with publicity being exploited as a deterrent as much as possible.

In these cases, the cloak of secrecy is disturbing to say the least. As it turns out, the owner of Blogetry.com was just as confused as his clients, and tried repeatedly to contact his web-host BurstNet, before their first enigmatic reply. In a message to owner Alexander Yusupov they stated, “We are limited as to the details we can provide to you, but note that this was a critical matter and the only available option to us was to immediately deactivate the server.” In another message they went on to say, “Please note that this was not a typical case, in which suspension and notification would be the norm. This was a critical matter brought to our attention by law enforcement officials. We had to immediately remove the server. “ They refused to give him any more information though, and would not even disclose the law-enforcement agency involved. Nor did they disclose the agency to CNET news, when they were granted an interview with BurstNet VP, Benjamin Arcus. The VP did disclose however, that the service was terminated at the direction of a law-enforcement agency that he could not reveal, and that it was not a copyright issue. So this wasn't about digital pirates after all?

The latest news coming out now is that the secret agency was actually the FBI. BurstNet has also reversed themselves and is now stating that it was their own choice to terminate the server, and that the FBI had nothing to do with the decision. So apparently BurstNet was not in fact restricted to this “only available option” as they had stated, but freely and willingly chose to terminate the server of their own accord, and have tried to justify the unprecedented action by leveling an accusation against Blogetry that there was a history of abuses, though the FBI has not accused Alexander Yusupov of any wrong-doing. What is being reported now is that the bureau had merely requested “voluntary emergency disclosure of information" regarding links to bomb-making instructions and an al-Qaeda hit-list of Americans which appeared on as many as one Blogetry hosted blog. Ah-ha! And there we have another boogie man folks. The ubiquitous yet imaginary al-Qaeda. (You will remember in a previous article here at MSMR where we pointed out that al-Qaeda is actually a government generated fabrication.) Mention al-Qaeda, bomb, or terrorist, and the FBI can instantly shut down 73,000 free-speech platforms without any due-process or oversight whatsoever because of what may have been one single alleged offender. In the post 9/11 era there is nothing “voluntary” about what is expected during an “emergency.” BurstNet has stated that they cannot restore any Blogetry data, even with the offending material removed. All of those blogs are just gone, completely wiped out. Of course we are supposed to believe BurstNet's revised position now, that they did not cave in under pressure by the FBI in the face of some alleged terrorist threat, and that they wiped out 73,000 blogs because of two alleged previous violations of their policies by Blogetry.. It doesn't seem that it really makes much difference anyhow at this point. Either BurstNet threw themselves under the bus, doing irreparable damage to their credibility and the future of their business to cover for the FBI, or they were in fact the ones who decided to pull the plug as they are stating now, making themselves the bane of free-speech advocates around the globe.

When all is said and done, it is now abundantly clear that these companies and government agencies working in concert, have begun dismantling large swaths of the internet this summer, with a three-pronged assault on liberty, through lawsuits, through cutting financing, and through direct action by blocking and terminating access to the internet. Make no mistake about it folks, this is the burning of books in the digital age. The only question is if you are going to accept the excuses ever-ready at the hand despots the world over, and then bow down to the march of the jack-boot, while gleefully chanting the rhetoric that it is all for our safety, all for our children, all for our own good as we spiral down into the pit of totalitarianism. This is it, our last chance, the end game. There is nothing else left for them to take, but these last bastions of free expression and liberty, where the news can be pondered and debated without censorship, where we can collect our memories and look back to them to see what our tomorrow has come to. Do not forget what you have read here today. Remember the burning of the books.

“Where they burn books, they will ultimately also burn people”

~Heinrich Heine

Here's to hoping that no one gets sued over this, but here are links to related material and articles:

http://www.corporations.org/media/
http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html
http://www.templetons.com/brad/copymyths.html
http://news.cnet.com/8301-31001_3-20010877-261.html?tag=mncol;txt
http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=964013
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-10692501
http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/07/19/blogetery-owners-shut-down-bombs-al-qaeda/
http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2010/07/22/the-curious-disappearance-of-blogetry/

What The Media Won't Tell You About North Korea Crisis

NSA Document Proves Alien Contact

According to this document, 29 messages from outer-space were intercepted and subsequently published in a National Security Agency technical journal. This document is a "key" created in order to interpret the messages. So we don't really know what the messages actually said, or if they were even successfully unlocked, but this document appears to prove that the NSA has in fact intercepted at least 29 radio messages of extra-terrestrial origin. When these messages may have been picked up, how they were heard, is anyone's guess at this point. But this seems to prove the we have indeed heard from aliens and the NSA knows it.

The pdf document is linked here directly from the NSA, so there is no question that the document is authentic:

http://www.nsa.gov/public_info/_files/ufo/key_to_et_messages.pdf

Some additional information is available at this link:

http://www.ufodigest.com/article/official-et-disclosure-nsa-document-admits-et-contact-kevin-w-smith

Public School Teaches Sedition

Our Constitution is already in peril, and it's little wonder why when you see the Leftist agenda being carried out in our public school systems. Nevertheless, the Constitution is still the law of the land and to call for its subversion, to teach anti-Constitutional values to young students, is nothing short of subversion of government, sedition.

The father of a 4th grade student in a Florida public school was furious to discover a crayon scrawled statement in his son's back pack. It read:

"I am willing to give up some of my Constitutional rights in order to be safer or more secure."

The paper is reported to have been written after a lawyer visited the class to discuss the Bill of Rights. The teacher and school administrators claim the student wrote the statement spontaneously, of his own free will. However, the father of the young 4th-grader maintains that such a complex political statement is beyond his son's reasoning and writing skill. He also claims that other students have corroborated his son's account that he was one of several students personally selected by the teacher to write out that specific sentence.

You can read details of this story first reported at: The Blaze

Also see:

Kids Belong to The Collective, Says MSNBC Host

Secrets and Mysteries of An Underground World

It's no secret that underground places have long offered a refuge for mankind, particularly in times of trouble. The ancient underground cities of Cappadocia are a wonderful example of the lengths man will go to in order to use the Earth for protection against danger.

Derinkuyu, Underground city, Ancient Village or Ancient refugee settlement?(VIDEO)

But today we don't really think of underground cities as being part of our modern reality. Our houses have basements where we might hole up in case of a bad storm, maybe a tornado shelter out in the yard. Many of our cities do extend underground with utility tunnels and subway tunnels, but we don't really think of those places as underground cities. In places like London the stark utility corridors beneath the city did serve as a place of refuge from the bombs of enemies, but areas like that beneath our cities are not designed for permanent nor comfortable living.

During the Cold War some folks took to building actual bomb shelters in their basements and back yards. Larger buildings like schools and office buildings stocked more elaborate fallout shelters in their basements. Of course, the government had the most elaborate facilities dug below ground and under mountains. Thousands of subterranean nuclear missile silos were all answerable to what may be the world's most famous underground bunker.

Cheyenne Mountain Complex (VIDEO)

The Cold War is over now though. The mission of NORAD still exists, but has taken on a largely different more diversified role than the bunker was originally purposed for. Nuclear missile silos have been abandoned or sold off as unique real-estate opportunities. Fallout shelters have become the relics of a bygone era, sometimes tourist attractions, but mostly used to store old furniture.

Greenbrier Resort Bunker (VIDEO)

Nuclear Missile Silo Home (VIDEO)

Abandoned Missile Silo (VIDEO)

The threat of a nuclear holocaust being rained down on us from the skies above is over. The need for these underground secret and secure places appears to have passed. Or has it really?

Conspiracy theories abound of secret underground places of all sorts. Everything from new and ongoing construction, to secret bases infested with aliens, even to a theory that the Earth itself is actually hollow and an populated by a hidden civilization.

Mysterious Denver Airport (VIDEO)

Hidden Alien Base, Dulce NM (VIDEO)

Hollow Earth (VIDEO)

Hollow Earth, aliens? Well, maybe maybe not. That's a big leap, but we need less faith for other theories, especially when seeing is believing. There are rumors of a vast underground network of cities, massive storage facilities, roadways, and maybe even a supersonic underground railroad. The network is believed to span the entire continent with hubs in many major cities.

I personally have spoken with a truck driver who made numerous deliveries to a massive underground facility just outside of Albany, the state capitol of NY, which he described as being much like what we are about to see here in these videos. This was about two years ago now, and he said the facility appeared to still be under construction. He is not really the conspiracy theory sort at all, an old school hard working, simple sort of man, so I didn't really have any reason to doubt him. But of course, you can't believe everything you read on the internet, and my acquaintance did not provide me with any pictures that I could share with you. Fortunately, other truck drivers have captured glimpses of facilities like this all over the country.



Entrance to U.S. underground City and roadway system from Awakened Warrior of Truth on Vimeo






This particular branch of the conspiracy theory realm is often termed "D.U.M.B.S." or Deep Underground Military Bunkers. I believe this is a bit of misnomer though. From what we see there in those very real bits of footage it there is nothing specifically military, but rather they appear to be corporate controlled facilities. That is not to say that the military is not involved at all of course, or ultimately in charge even, but the corporate influence cannot be ignored.

The Iron Mountain company is a leading example of a relationship between government and the corporate world when it comes to underground secrets. Established on the banks of the Hudson River in 1951, the company was reformed in the 1970's and now it's most famous facility the one featured in this news report.


One curious point I note though, is the difference between what we see there in the Iron Mountain video, and what we saw in the other videos. The sheer difference in size, when it comes to the dimensions of the tunnels and passageways is curious indeed. Then of course, we also have to ask why companies and/or the government are going to such expense, a hidden expense at that, for such a vast underground network. Surely all of these facilities can't be there simply to store business documents and historical artifacts. 

And again, we have to consider that these facilities may be interconnected, all or most of them anyway. Numerous truck drivers have reported driving from one region of the country to another, completely underground. Frankly, I believe that much. The way they talk about it, certain details, just strikes me as credible testimony.The technological feat is impressive, but not impossible. The only reason I would really have to doubt it, is that there is no clear or obvious motivation for the power that be to go to all that trouble, unless of course they know something they aren't telling us. (Or, maybe this is just the way the uber-wealthy piss away their fortunes while the working stiff hovers on the edge of starvation in order to feed their corporate mechanisms.)

If we accept that this underground network of cities, facilities and roadways does indeed exist, then it is no stretch to accept the evidence of a massive facility under the Denver airport. The evidence of that is already strong anyway. But an airport right smack dab in the middle of the country would be ideal as a central transportation and distribution hub for goods to be transported by air, on land, and below it. Not to mention the fact too that the Denver airport is not very far from the Cheyenne Mountain facility in Colorado Springs, the central hub of U.S. military power outside of the Pentagon, and the one most likely to have command of U.S. forces after some cataclysmic event like nuclear war or perhaps an asteroid impact.

So all in all, it looks like some of the stuff that conspiracy theorists are admonished for, and called crackpots or lunatics, actually has some pretty common sense conclusions. Maybe we don't know exactly why they are doing this, but at the same time, it really doesn't seem any more far-fetched than a secret underground bunker for Congress under a famous resort.



Copyright, used by permission

Biochemical Addiction to Junk Food

 For more information visit: GreenMedInfo

Addiction To Junk Food: More Than Meets The Eye

When it comes to processed food, excessive amounts of sugar and hydrogenated fats is the rule rather than the exception. It is no secret anymore that there is a very distinct thread linking the increased consumption of such foods, coupled with relentless advertising campaigns and the epidemic proportions of diabetes and obesity in all age groups on a global scale. In fact, if current trends continue, it is estimated that by 2030, more than 86% of Americans will be either overweight or obese. For some people, this picture looks dreadful enough already, but the truth is that it barely scratches the surface of the problem.

Neurobiology research has shown that food can cause serious addiction, the kind that addictive drugs do. Dr Nicole Avena and her colleagues from the department of Psychiatry, University of Florida, report that the consumption of sugar not only alters brain function and behavior, but it also elicits the same type of withdrawal symptoms like opiate drugs do. In other words, sugar affects the opioid receptors in the brain, which are recognized by natural (endogenous or not) opioid substances. On the other hand, foods rich in fat seem to affect the brain in a different way, although they cause withdrawal-type symptoms as well. Many studies show that there is a unique relationship between emotional balance and fatty acids. 

For example, a study published in The Journal of Clinical Investigation in 2011 tested the effects of fat consumption in healthy people while experiencing experimentally induced sad feelings. Within minutes the sad feelings were significantly alleviated and the subjects reported improved mood, while MRI scans confirmed the expected brain response. This study is important because it shows that fat actually does not even have to be properly digested in order to modify brain functions. The mere presence of fat in the gut triggers the release of gastrointestinal hormones, which regulate neurological and emotional responses within very few minutes. 

The above studies prove that junk food, high in fat and sugar, is so much more than excessive calories. It truly creates addiction on a biochemical and neurological level. It would be naive to believe that the richness of junk food in these specific compounds is an accident. Michael Moss explains in his incredible book "Salt, Sugar, Fat: How the Food Giants Hooked Us" that the amount of secretive research invested by Big Food giants in finding the right combinations of the cheapest and most addictive ingredients for their products, is tremendous. 

What neuroscience is only now starting to understand and elucidate, food companies knew it all along. And they have capitalized hard on it by selling processed food especially designed to bypass appetite control and neurological security valves of any unsuspected victim. Due to the complexity and interconnectedness of the biological functions in the human body, the overall impact of processed food on human physiology, health, life expectancy and quality of life in this generation is still hard to estimate. 

But again the full extent of this slow, but efficient, genocide cannot be not fully appreciated if the impact on the future generations is not assessed as well. Latest research shows that the diet during pregnancy has a significant impact on the nutritional choices of the offspring. It is now confirmed that when the expectant mother follows a high-fat diet, her baby shows a measurable preference for sugar. However, this is not just a behavioral trait casually passed on to the next generation by means of mimicking the behavior of adults. On the contrary, as a result of the maternal diet, the DNA and subsequent expression of genes encoding opioid and dopamine receptors in the brain of the child is altered in a manner that promotes addiction. 

This is no surprise, since repeated use of certain drugs has been well documented to cause enzymatic DNA modifications (epigenetic changes) which disrupt neuronal gene programs and support addictive behavior. This scientific fact explains why the kids of obese mothers are heavier with increased fat mass and have elevated insulin and glucose levels in their blood in comparison with control groups. Experiments show that the genetic disruption induced by maternal junk food consumption during pregnancy has long-term effects on the child's behavior and neurological responses. 

In a twisted way, the new generation is genetically pre-programmed to be addicted to junk food, even before they are born. This perfect self-feeding loop guarantees long-term profits for the food corporations and chronic debilitating disease for humans, for generations to come. By designing and selling addictive, low quality and disease-promoting products, Big Food has achieved the unthinkable: to create a dedicated army of health-compromised, addicted fans, whose cognitive, biochemical and even genetic potential to break free of their addiction is hijacked before birth.

The Beautiful Sheeple

Why Americans Are So Ignorant -- It's Not Only Fox News, There Are Some Understandable Reasons for it

Sure propaganda, government secrecy and Fox News have a lot to do with it. But there are broader societal pressures as well.

In 2008, Rick Shenkman, the Editor-in-Chief of the  History News Network, published a book entitled  Just How Stupid Are We? Facing the Truth about the American Voter. In it he demonstrated, among other things, that most Americans were: (1) ignorant about major international events, (2) knew little about how their own government runs and who runs it, (3) were nonetheless willing to accept government positions and policies even though a moderate amount of critical thought suggested they were bad for the country, and (4) were readily swayed by stereotyping, simplistic solutions, irrational fears and public relations babble.

Shenkman spent 256 pages documenting these claims, using a great number of polls and surveys from very reputable sources. Indeed, in the end it is hard to argue with his data. So, what can we say about this?
One thing that can be said is that this is not an abnormal state of affairs. As has been suggested in prior analyses, ignorance of non-local affairs (often leading to inaccurate assumptions, passive acceptance of authority, and illogical actions) is, in fact, a default position for any population.

To put it another way, the majority of any population will pay little or no attention to news stories or government actions that do not appear to impact their lives or the lives of close associates. If something non-local happens that is brought to their attention by the media, they will passively accept government explanations and simplistic solutions.

Read the full article at: AlterNet


((Caution))) explicit content:

Gun Confiscation Underway In NY Through HIPAA Violations?

Manasquan, NJ --(Ammoland.com)- Remember all those who denied that firearms confiscation as a result of New York’s new gun laws was too “insane” to even consider?

That it was strictly in the realm of paranoid conspiracy theorists and the “it cant happen here crowd”?

Those were and remain some of the standard replies to anyone who even thought about the possibility, let alone gave voice to it, despite the fact that Gov Cuomo and numerous other officials made public comments about such a plan, as I discussed in my article “Feinstein & Cuomo Admit Planning Australian Style Government Gun Buy Back” .

Elected Officials, the media, various Gun Control Groups and their zealous forced disarmament supporters, even some firearms owners themselves all insisted it was to crazy to even consider.

There’s just one huge problem it is happening now in New York State!

Read more at Ammoland.com: http://www.ammoland.com/2013/04/new-york-gun-confiscation-underway/#ixzz2Q0A9hSui

Men More Likely to Suffer Depression Over Not Having Kids

Even though there's often more social pressure on women to have kids, men may actually feel more depressed and lonely over not having children, according to the results of a small British survey.

The findings were presented at the annual meeting of the British Sociological Association in London Wednesday (April 3) by Robin Hadley, of the United Kingdom's Keele University, who polled 27 men and 81 women who didn't have kids.

About the same proportions of men and women said they wanted kids (59 percent of men and 63 percent of women). Among that group, half of the men said they experienced isolation because they weren't parents, while just over a quarter of women said the same.

Compared with women, these men also were more likely to feel jealous of other parents and sad, angry, and depressed over not having kids.

"There is very little research on the desire for fatherhood among men," Hadley said in a statement. "This challenges the common idea that women are much more likely to want to have children than men, and that they consistently experience a range of negative emotions more deeply than men if they don't have children."

Read more at LiveScience

Also see:

Crying Over Spilled Milk

The Collectivist Conspiracy (VIDEO)

YouTube description:


In this exclusive 80 minute video interview, legendary conspiracy author G. Edward Griffin explains how his research, which spans no less than 5 decades, has revealed a banking elite obsessed with enforcing a world government under a collectivist model that will crush individualism and eventually institute martial law as a response to the inevitable backlash that will be generated as a result of a fundamental re-shaping of society.

Griffin discusses the similarities between the extreme left and the extreme right in the false political paradigm and how this highlights a recurring theme - collectivism. Collectivism is the opposite of individualism and believes that the interests of the individual must be sacrificed for the greater good of the greater number, explains Griffin, uniting the doctrines of communism and fascism. Both the Republican and Democrat parties in the United States are committed to advancing collectivism and this is why the same policies are followed no matter who is voted in to the White House.

"All collectivist systems eventually deteriorate into a police state because that's the only way you can hold it together," warns Griffin.

Carroll Quigley, Georgetown University Professor and mentor to former president Bill Clinton, explained in his books Tragedy and Hope and The Anglo-American Establishment, how the elite maintained a silent dictatorship while fooling people into thinking they had political freedom, by creating squabbles between the two parties in terms of slogans and leadership, while all the time controlling both from the top down and pursuing the same agenda. Griffin documents how the Tea Party, after its beginnings as a grass roots movement, was later hijacked by the Republicans through the likes of Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck.

Pointing out how Republicans and Democrats agree on the most important topics, such as US foreign policy, endless wars in the Middle East, and the dominance of the private banking system over the economy, Griffin lays out how the left-right hoax is used to steer the destiny of America.

Griffin also talks at length on a myriad of other important subjects, such as the move towards a Chinese-style censored Internet, the demonization of the John Birch Society as a racist extremist group, the Hegelian dialectic, the power of tax-exempt foundations and the Council on Foreign Relations, the movement towards world government, and the question of whether the elite are really worried about the growing awareness of their agenda amongst Americans.

Cop Made Chief After Negligent Homicide Conviction

This sorry excuse for a police officer was convicted of negligent homicide after shooting a motorist to death. He was fired from his job, but later had his conviction expunged and has now been hired in another town as the department's chief.

“You put the uniform back on and you look at yourself in the mirror, and you think, I’m back,” he said. “It’s a good feeling.”

Just goes to show, yet again, that police can literally get away with murder, and whatever the hell else they feel like pulling.

D.A.'s Office Complicit In Brutality Coverup

D.A.'s Office Complicit In Brutality Coverup

I try to be as unbiased as possible when it comes to cases of police brutality. Indeed, I have made several posts here defending the police even when they have acted violently, because I understand that it is a difficult job and at times it does in fact require violence to get the job done. I am not squeamish and I am not prone to knee-jerk reactions. I have seen things from both sides of the line, having been both first-responder and victim of a vicious assault by police.

I must say though, that at the end of the day, I have little sympathy for police and the job they do when I hear stories like this one. This is not just about a few bad apples beating the crap out of innocent civilians. This is about institutionalized corruption and brutality. Let's check out the video, and I will continue below.


So we see there are two separate incidents here to discuss. In the first, we see police beat, tase, and strangle a woman who is handcuffed in the back of the police cruiser. Personally, I can't think of any legitimate reason why police should be beating on anyone in handcuffs. I can understand that suspects in cuffs can still be unruly and do things like start spitting in the backseat and so forth. I can see how that would make a police officer angry, but it really still does not excuse beating up a suspect in a punitive manner. It certainly does not excuse using the taser on someone, and it absolutely does not excuse choking a woman. Here in NY State, choking a woman is a crime in and of itself, aside from standard assault-type charges.

New strangulation statute proving an effective tool for law enforcement

Imagine for a moment that what you saw there was a man beating on his wife in that manner. If the public were to see something of that nature there would be absolute outrage in a community, calling for all sorts of horrible things be done to a man who would dare to do something like that to a woman. But because it is a police officer doing this to a suspect, the public is apathetic, as if in a trance, or even openly defend the actions of police in cases like this. But this wasn't just one officer either, it was two. Two powerful men beating the crap out of a woman in the back seat of a car in the middle of the night. Is there really any excuse for that?

With the new strangulation law on the books, I find it hard to believe that a man would be excused for simply choking a woman even if she came at him with a kitchen knife screaming bloody murder, much less pummeling and tasing a woman. Certainly there would be no excuse whatsoever for a man to do this to a defenseless, unarmed woman restrained in handcuffs, unless he was a cop of course.

Next we see the case of a man who had his rib cage crushed in for the crime of not understanding a police order. Instead of putting his hands behind his back as instructed, he puts his hands in the air. A typical reaction really for anyone who watches television and instinctively thinks "hands up" if they are ever in trouble with the police. It is also quite easy for a police officer to take a suspect into custody from that position. You simply snap the cuff on one wrist, guide the suspects arm down toward the buttocks, do the same with a firm grasp on the other arm, and lock the second wrist into the open cuff. Easy as that, suspect in custody.

Instead, one officer decided to body slam the suspect to the concrete, while the other decides to use a knee to blow out the man's ribcage. And of course, no police beating would be complete without the application of the taser a few times. Even if the man had been a little unruly, a bit uncooperative, not fully understanding what was happening, there was nothing there to show he was being violent, or to warrant that level of force that we saw used against him.

As a general rule, the police are expected to follow the Use of Force Continuum. Not every department uses the same model, and the standards are not universal among the different models, but generally speaking the principle is to only apply that force which is necessary to safely bring a suspect into custody. As safely as possible for the officer and the suspect I might add. I saw nothing in that video which showed the suspect was assaultive in any way. If there was intentional resistance at all, it appears to have been passive. I didn't see any active resistance as in attempts to break free or flee. Even if that were the case, once the suspect was down, that should have been the extent of the force necessary to pull the suspects arms behind his back and get the cuffs on. Tasing him and breaking five ribs is clearly an excessive use of force in this case.

So what we have seen there, yet again, are a few more instances of gratuitous, unwarranted violence by police against a civilian. Almost every day we see a new video of this nature pop up on YouTube, but we are still expected to believe that these are all "isolated" incidents, the work of  "a few bad apples." Never mind that thousands of cases like this never make it to the light of day. More often than not, the victim is not lucky enough to have a video camera rolling when they are pummeled by police. And without a tape, there is little chance of finding a lawyer who will bother to handle your case. Even with a tape, it is clearly an uphill battle to hold the police accountable for their crimes.

In one instance linked here, a reporter was facing 21 years in prison for airing an excessive force complaint. He was subsequently convicted on three felony counts of violating wiretapping laws, for posting the content on YouTube.

In another incident, a man was arrested and had his head split open by police simply because he asked for a complaint form.

Time and time again I have heard people say something along the lines of "well, if a bad cop does something to you, you should report it to their supervisor." The notion that a civilian can find justice when they are the victim of a crime at the hands of police, or that police will be held accountable for such crimes, is false. How could we possibly expect an officer's supervisor to take such a complaint seriously, when we see what happened in those two incidents above in the main video? The police charged the victims of their brutal assault with a crime, resisting arrest. Not just one "bad apple" but three police officers in these two incidents alone, not only covering for one another but actually participating in the violence. Their supervisors, right on up to the chief of police were well aware of what was on those tapes, yet the charges against the victims stood, and the officers were not held accountable in any way. Beyond the police department protecting their own, the county district attorney's office also saw the tapes, and failed in their duty to even investigate, much less to actually prosecute those officers for the brutal assaults.

How many other cases has the DA's office refused to prosecute over the years, simply because the perpetrators were police officers? How complicit is the top brass in any department, in any county, even in any state, in covering up crimes committed by cops? How many thousands, even millions of people have been viciously beaten, wrongfully prosecuted, and even killed by police, without anyone ever being held accountable and without justice ever being served?

Ladies and gentleman, this is not about running down the police for the sake of running down the police. This is the reality of the totalitarian police-state we now live in. The boys in blue today are no better than the "brown shirt" terrorists who put the Nazis in power. It makes no difference if you are a trouble-maker or an innocent person just going about your business. Any one of you reading this could find yourself, or a loved one, being beaten in the back of a police car in the middle of the night, having your rib cage shattered along some lonely road by a few thug cops, or worse, and there isn't a damn thing you can do about it.

EXTRA:

No sooner had I posted this article, another story popped up that just goes to prove that police can literally get away with murder even when they are caught and prosecuted.

Cop Made Chief After Negligent Homicide Conviction

Federal Law Makes Every Single Person In America a Drug Felon

Dimethyltryptamine, or DMT is a Schedule I drug according to the Federal government and the DEA.

Schedule I drugs, substances, or chemicals are defined as drugs with no currently accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse. Schedule I drugs are the most dangerous drugs of all the drug schedules with potentially severe psychological or physical dependence. -SOURCE

Because of this classification, anyone reading this article is felon. You are not only in possession of DMT, but also a user, and a manufacturer of it. You see, DMT is a naturally ocurring chemical in the brains of humans, animals, and elsewhere in nature as well. Which also makes you a distributor of Schedule I drugs if you give away free kittens, or sell your lawn clippings to your neighbor for landfill.

Check out a more in-depth article from Natural News.

Also check out our article Everything Is Illegal.




Tweet

Boston Crime Lab Scandal Could Put 34k Felons Back On Streets

The Massachusetts legal system is reeling in the wake of a 27-count indictment against one of their leading laboratory technicians. 35-year-old drug lab worker Annie Dookhan has been accused of tampering with evidence and obstruction of justice.

The full impact of her alleged crimes may never be known, and cannot be overstated. In this day and age of scientific law-enforcement, with so much of the public convinced that laboratory work is the "holy grail" in any criminal prosecution, the integrity of those labs is the pinnacle of public trust; the very bedrock of how we have come to even define justice itself, in so many cases, in the modern era. Popular television shows reinforce this idea that laboratory evidence is irrefutable and absolute. Prosecutors are want to nurture this sentiment among jurors.

Of course, any reasonable person might consider that even in science there are errors from time to time. With DNA evidence for example, we sometimes hear the "odds" of accuracy. Sometimes as accurate as one in a hundred-thousand. Sometimes though, huge odds are defied as in the case of lab analyst Kathryn Troyer, who discovered a near-match defying 1-in-113 billion odds between two felons in the same state.

Accuracy of DNA "Matches" to Definitively Identify Suspects Questioned

What happens though, when we throw in a more human element to the science? Something that undermines even the very best science. Personally, I never really thought too much about it, but always sort of assumed that the relationships between lab staff and the legal system were kept sterile, to a large degree. I assumed that some measures were in place to ensure lab workers were not only ethically impartial, but also that systems of anonymity and lab-controls were in place to reinforce the ethical standard. I even assumed that lab work was double-checked. In other words, I foolishly believed in the system and never thought that something like this could happen. I certainly never thought I would ever see a case of this nature, of such magnitude.

Annie Dookhan began her career at the state's Jamaica Plains drug lab in 2003. In that time, she has handled evidence in more than 34,000 cases. Any convictions stemming from evidence she processed are now likely to be overturned. Worse, this has called into question the integrity of the entire lab, and countless more cases. The lab has since been shut down and numerous people have been fired or resigned, but not before the damage was done.

In June of 2011 she was caught improperly removing drugs from evidence storage in 60 different cases, but apparently her supervisors did nothing to stop her from being involved in more drug cases after that. Later that year she wrote in a private email to Norfolk Assistant ­District Attorney George ­Papachristos, “I have full access to anything and everything, one of the advantages, so some of the other chemists are resentful of me.”

The long and often quite personal email exchanges with Papachristos have been closely scrutinized and seen by many as unethical from both a professional and personal standpoint. Dookhan's marriage has been on the rocks since her husband uncovered emails back in 2009. The prosecutor has not been charged with any crime himself though, and it is not known if the flirtatious banner ever led to more than a handful of personal meetings. Nonetheless, it does show a much closer relationship than one might expect between a prosecutor, and a lab technician who is expected to be impartial. So much so, that Papachristos resigned from the DA's office.

Clearly, from her own words, impartiality was never even something she considered. She did not see her job as being a technician who processes evidence, but rather her stated goal was “getting [drug dealers] off the streets.” It should go without saying here, that this was certainly not her job as a lab technician. Nevertheless she was all too happy to do favors for prosecutors, while shunning defense attorneys even when she was required to give evidence to them. She saw herself as part of the prosecution team, as did many prosecutors themselves, with one declaring "No no no!!! I need you!!!" when Dookhan said she would not be able to testify in a case.

Dookhan is alleged to have lied on the witness stand in court about having a Master's degree in chemistry, and shot out emails giving herself grandiose job titles she simply did not have. In correspondence with various agencies she identified herself  with self-appointed titles like "special agent of operations” or "on-call terrorism supervisor." She even went so far as to create fake email conversations with a US attorney, who's name she misspelled, and forwarded to other recipients.

Assuming of course that all of these allegations are true, one has to wonder how such an obviously pathological liar could go on for so long without anyone bothering to consider that something like this might happen. Police and prosecutors were clearly willing to look the other way and even cultivate a close relationship with Dookhan, to encourage her, in order to secure easy convictions. As of yet, there are no criminal charges against anyone else aside from the lab-tech herself, but it seems clear that ethical and moral obligations were tossed aside in favor of making their jobs easier.

As a result, hundred of millions of dollars have been wasted. Entire careers have been built to be little more than sandcastles. And tens of thousands convicted felons are now poised to flood the streets of Massachusetts, then out across the country. If it was their intent to actually make the public safe, then the government certainly failed miserably in that mandate. Not only because of the threat posed by these potentially dangerous criminals being set loose upon society, but because of the threat posed by the government itself.

It may be all-too-easy to assume that all or even most of these convicts were actually guilty, but that simply does not hold up to the facts, and certainly carries no weight against the core values of our entire justice system. In the face of reasonable doubt, the presumption of innocence is paramount. Without these standards, we might just go ahead and just give the police a license to kill at will and close down the courts.

Understanding this, we must assume now that the government sent more than 34,000 innocent people to prison on the word of just one deluded lab technician. That my friends, is more dangerous than any drug dealer. Even if only in our hearts we assume that just some of these convicts were actually innocent, imagine for a moment that one of them happened to be you, your spouse, your parent or child. Imagine for a moment how many lives have been irreparably laid to waste by the lies of just one woman, and a government who did not care. A government that in fact has a vested interest in securing more convictions even if they are not justified. A government that encouraged this woman to commit her crimes against the people. A government that presumes guilt of anyone who crosses into their sights, and has even dispatched agents to threaten the hundreds of inmates who have already been exonerated.

"We tell them, 'Listen, we know what you were doing before and we're watching you.'" -Boston Police Commissioner, Edward Davis

Perhaps the most frightening aspect to all of this is that this can only be the tip of the iceberg. This woman was so clearly delusional and so easily cultivated this relationship with prosecutors, it begs the question how prevalent this sort of thing is throughout the country. Especially in labs and agencies where this sort of thing is likely done more discreetly. If there are no practical standards in place to prevent something like this from happening, how could we possibly trust that this sort of thing is not rampant? How many lab workers compromise cases for monetary gain, for romantic favors, for promotions, or to simply stroke their own ego? How many might even quietly carry on the work of a zealot in their own private war against people they see as evil? Are we supposed to ignorantly believe that this is simply an isolated incident, one bad apple, and assume that it would never happen again? Are we honestly supposed to believe that some fear of the law will prevent lab-techs from committing these sorts of crimes, when the government itself benefits from these crimes?

If convicted, will Annie Dookhan be sentenced to as much time in prison as the innocent people she put there would have done?


Here are two media stories on the case:

Indicted drug analyst Annie Dookhan’s e-mails reveal her close personal ties to prosecutors

Crime Lab Scandal Leaves Mass. Legal System In Turmoil


Also see these articles and videos:

Mexican drug lord asserts he was working for US government

Obama's Drug War

Afghan Opium Farming Flourishes Under US Protection

Man Shot Dead By Police Home Invaders

Cops Give Free Drugs To Teens For Training

Cocaine Cop Gets 3 1/2 Years

Cops Munch Pot Brownies








Tweet

Collateral Murder: A Wikileaks Video of an Iraq War Atrocity

On the tenth anniversary of the United States invasion of Iraq, we have decided to share this one video as an example, and a reminder, of just how terrible war really is. The mission, muddled, the enemy, undefined, the effort, a waste of time. This video of one single incident can almost summarize the entire misguided American adventure there. 



For an overview on some of our coverage related to the so-called War on Terror, a few highlights were posted on our FACEBOOK page. You might also review labels such as 9/11, war on terror, etc., in the sidebar at right.


Tweet

Wounded Marine Humiliated By TSA Inspections

This is certainly not the first time we have heard about the TSA doing inspections that challenge our sensibilities.

TSA To Grandma: Get Naked And Show Us Your Colostomy Bag

TSA pat-down leaves traveler covered in urine

Strip-Searching and Terrorizing Children (VIDEOS)

Today, the latest headline on the subject is about a United States Marine who had his legs blown off in combat, but was made to endure a rigorous inspection by TSA authorities in Phoenix.

TSA agents 'humiliated' wounded Marine with aggressive inspection: report

Reading the story, it's certainly enough to piss off any patriot. The fact that the man is a Marine seems to be the focus of the attention being given the report and the Congressman.

Rep. Duncan Hunter said in his letter Monday that the Marine, who is still on active duty and showed TSA agents his military identification, was still forced to undergo that scrutiny... The congressman asked TSA to detail its procedures to inspecting wounded U.S. troops at airports, and to consider whether agents should show “situational awareness.”

But should it really matter if the man is active duty or not? Should it matter how he was injured or what his disability is? Not to the TSA it shouldn't. Not if we are going to accept that their job really is in the interest of public safety as the government claims.

Now don't get me wrong, I am not unsympathetic at all to this Marine, his sacrifices, and the crappy ordeal they put him through there at the airport. But really, why should it even be considered that he be exempt from this sort of humiliation and pain that the rest of the people in this nation must endure?

After all, a terrorist could pretend to be a wounded veteran, show a fraudulent I.D. that he was an active-duty member of the military, or even actually be an active-duty member of the armed forces while bent on destruction and mayhem. This is all just as possible as, let's say, airline pilots themselves having things like guns on-board aircraft.

TSA rules led to pilot’s gun firing in flight

Police nab airline pilot with loaded gun in luggage

Police take gun from distraught JetBlue pilot

Or for that matter, the TSA agents themselves could be terrorists.

TSA Memo is Bombshell Invalidation of Airport Security

Or sex predators and deviants.

Female Passengers Say They’re Targeted By TSA

TSA harassment sends rape victim to emergency room

TSA officer is alleged child pornographer

Disgraced Pedo-Priest Patting Down Passengers in Philly as TSA Supervisor

Submit to Sexual Degradation At the Hands of Your Overlords

Should we even be considering exemptions at all, for anyone? If for troops, then why not for police, or people who have a lot of money, or white people, or non-Jews?

Maybe it's a good thing that troops are getting a slap-in-the-face wake up call about what is happening here in this country. This is the freedom they are fighting for.

Pepsi Replaces Sugar With Aborted Fetuses

So what exactly is this magic ingredient that will be appearing in a new version of Pepsi, and how is it made? Unfortunately, those questions are hard to answer. Senomyx... refers to them only as 'enhancers' or 'ingredients'... The products work by triggering receptors on the tongue and tricking your taste buds into sensing sweetness — or saltiness or coolness, in the case of the company's other programs...

So are Senomyx's covert ingredients safe? That, too, is anyone's guess... many of its enhancers have 'been granted'GRAS (Generally Recognized As Safe) status, but all that means is that the company did its own assessment and then concluded everything was fine. We don't know whether Senomyx did any testing since the company isn't required to submit anything to the FDA.

There's no reason to think that Senomyx's products will cause harm, but until or unless Pepsi decides to share details about how exactly it's achieving a 60 percent reduction in sugar while keeping the taste the same, customers will be drinking their 'scientifically advantaged' sodas completely in the dark.”

The lack of labeling requirements is particularly troublesome and will probably become an issue in the future. Since these compounds (whatever they are) are used in such minute quantities, they don’t have to be listed on the label. They’ll simply fall under the generic category of artificial and/or natural flavors. What this means is that the product will appear to be much “healthier” than it might otherwise be, were a flavor enhancer not used.

According to a 2010 CBS report, Senomyx’s flavor enhancers were already being sold outside the US at that time. For example, Nestle was by 2010 using an MSG flavor enhancer in its Maggi brand soups, sauces, condiments and instant noodles, and Ajinomoto was also using a similar ingredient in products for the Chinese market. This means less of the artificial sweetener is needed to create the same sweet taste as before, but while one could argue that this is a good thing, I suspect we will ultimately learn that this flavor enhancement method has multiple unforeseen adverse consequences — metabolically, and biologically.
Consequences of Food Alteration are More the Rule than the Exception...

There are many reasons why you're better off choosing natural whole foods in lieu of processed alternatives, but one of the primary ones is that junk foods contain additives that increase your toxic load, which in turn may increase your tendency to develop cancer. As of yet, there is NO medical research to back up the assertion that manipulating your taste buds in the way Senomyx’ products do is safe and healthy in the long term. As an example, I would point to the evidence now available showing that one of the reasons why artificial sweeteners do not work as advertised is because the taste of sweet itself is tied into your metabolic functioning in a way that we still do not fully understand... As a result, artificially sweetened products, oftentimes boasting zero calories, actually result in greater weight gain than sweetened products when used “in the real world.”

It's easy to forget that the processed, pre-packaged foods and fast food restaurants of today are actually a radical change in terms of the history of food production. Much of what we eat today bears very little resemblance of real food. Many products are loaded with non-nutritive fillers — purposely designed to just “take up space” to make you think you’re getting more than you really are — along with any number of additives. Many additives have been shown to have harmful effects on mood, behavior, metabolic functioning and biochemistry.

Now, with the introduction of untested engineered flavor enhancers, you’re left wondering whether processed foods with “cleaner” labels really are safer and healthier or not...

Remember, because Senomyx’ flavor enhancers are used in such low concentrations they are not required to undergo the FDA's usual safety approval process for food additives.
 
The disease trends we're now seeing are only going to get worse as much of the processed foods consumed today are not even food-based. Who knows what kind of genetic mutations and malfunctions we're creating for ourselves and future generations when a MAJORITY of our diet consists of highly processed and artificial foods that contain substances never before consumed by humans in all of history.

Read more at the original source:

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2013/03/17/senomyx-flavor-enhancers.aspx?e_cid=20130317_SNL_Art_1&utm_source=snl&utm_medium=email&utm_content=art1&utm_campaign=20130317

Also see:

Tastes Like Baby

You Ate Beaver Ass Juice

11 Disgusting Ingredients You Eat Every Day That Food Companies Don't Talk About

Tweet